Sub menu

Spillover #30

Comments on our 29th #spillover thread have closed, so it’s time for a new one. Some reminders:

#spillover is part of our comment moderation system for keeping other threads on-topic. It is intended as a constructive space for tangential discussions which are veering off-topic on other threads. This is part of our blog netiquette, which has the general goal of making it as simple as possible for commenters to find discussions focussed on topics of particular interest without entirely stifling worthwhile tangents of sorta-related or general interest. #spillover is also a space for those ongoing/endless disagreements and 101 issues that just keep on popping up.

Commenters are encouraged to respect the topic of each post and be proactive regarding inevitable thread-drift in long threads: we hope that commenters will cheerfully volunteer to take off-topic responses into #spillover so that each post’s discussion gets room to breathe and tangents can be indulged in a room of their own.

Post navigation

7 comments for “Spillover #30”

In response to Ludlow22
I Do agree that if you take the meme at face value, then yes, I do agree. Neither party is able to consent.

However, my problem with the meme is the context in which the meme was posted.. It was part of an ongoing series of anti-feminist posts from a relative of mine as a ‘Gotcha, Feminism™!’ because of course all feminists ever want to do is demonize all men as rapists and all women as innocent victims. It’s poking at a strawman.

To which I give an exasperated sigh, because no.

And because, yes, that is how equality works. But people want to be all “AHA! WHO’S THE REAL RAPIST THEN?!? FEMINISM HAS FAILED!” when the truth of the matter is, sometimes life is fucking difficult and there are situations without easy answers and two people both being able consent, based on definition, do not actually cancel each other out. Jake being unable to consent does not mean that he did not rape Josie. Likewise, if Jake said that Josie raped him, her being drunk does not mean that she didn’t.

My issue with original poster is idea that only Josie was unable to consent.

My issue with the meme based on the poster is the ‘Gotcha!’ to an argument no one is having, given the context of this relatives previous posts.

My issue with the meme based on the poster is the ‘Gotcha!’ to an argument no one is having, given the context of this relatives previous posts.

Isn’t this argument disproven by the existence of the original poster itself?

I get that many feminists don’t believe that only women can be raped, but in the context of collegiate anti-sexual assault activism, it’s actually not a strawman at all. Dean Sue Wasiolek of Duke University, who’s responsible for handling sexual assault investigates, stated in a hearing that in cases where both parties are drunk:

assuming it is a male and female, it is the responsibility in the case of the male to gain consent before proceeding with sex.

My campus sexual assault education said almost the exact same thing, word for word. In fact, at this very moment there are a number of ongoing class action Title IX lawsuits filed by male students who have been expelled from university for having mutually intoxicated sex after obtaining verbal consent, specifically because they were the male partner.

So I get that it’s not what you believe, or even what most feminists believe, but it isn’t a strawman in the context of campus policy.

ludlow22

August 3, 2015 at 5:45 pm

investigations*

I can find a neigh-infinite amount of quotes demonstrating the non-strawman nature of the meme; I don’t mean to come off as aggressive, but here are a couple more:

“Men who are truly incapacitated can’t get erections… [a man] who is too drunk to consent is also too drunk to be capable of penetrative intercourse.”

Note that this isn’t just biologically untrue, it’s a flat-out rape myth of the same genre as ”women who orgasm during rape weren’t really raped.”

Brett Sokolow, who has helped more than 80 universities create their sexual assault and Title IX compliance policies:

If [the man] really felt victimized, why didn’t he make a complaint?

I could go on.

Angel H.

August 29, 2015 at 9:02 am

pheenibarbidoll:
I know it’s complaining, but every conversation is only black and white. No other poc get to sit at the table, because 2 groups have all the seats.

This is absolutely true.

What I’ve noticed in online forums is when the mainstream news says, “white people have privilege and black people cry racism,” there is usually someone who comments that “blacks are always the victims; you don’t hear Asians/Latin@s/Native Americans pulling the race card!” Meanwhile, other POC are like, “erm, hello? We’re standing right here.” And Black people are so busy trying to defend themselves from white people, that we aren’t paying attention either.

Intersectionality is usually talked about in terms of feminism. We also need more intersectionality within anti-racism activism.

Angel H.

August 29, 2015 at 9:03 am

Sorry I fucked up your name, pheeno…

I suck at typing on my phone! :-P

pheenobarbidoll

August 29, 2015 at 11:38 am

No worries. I’ve never cared about little stuff like that. Mine is clearly not a real name lol

And yes, it does feel ( as of late especially) that no other race is even noticed. Black and white dominate the conversation, the news, the articles, the blogs, the activism..all of it. If I were an alien, I’d think only 2 races of humans existed.

Not that I want Black people to stop talking,but it would be nice if we were part of the conversation too. That aclu link in the original thread didn’t bother to include when anyone else receive the right to vote. And it didn’t happen at the same time. But for orgs like that to not mention us…damn. Feels like we don’t exist.